AMD EPYC 9555P vs Intel Xeon 6960P Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data splits the two processors into distinct usage profiles. The Intel Xeon 6960P wins 8 of the 14 head-to-head comparisons, while the AMD EPYC 9555P takes 6. The margin of victory matters more than the raw count, and the Intel part tends to win by larger percentages in specialized workloads.

The Intel Xeon 6960P dominates in workloads that stress memory access patterns and integer-heavy operations. Its largest wins come in passmark_physics at 61.2% ahead, passmark_find_prime_numbers at 39.1% ahead, and passmark_random_string_sorting at 32.6% ahead. These are not marginal victories; they indicate a substantial advantage in workloads involving prime number generation, physics calculations, and sorting algorithms. The Intel part also leads in data compression by 6%, data encryption by 8.8%, floating point math by 8.4%, multithread by 5.7%, and extended instructions by 1.2%.

The AMD EPYC 9555P counters in rendering and general integer workloads. It leads all three Cinebench multicore tests by a consistent 3.6%, wins integer math by 7.5%, and takes the single-thread tests by 3.6%. The Cinebench consistency is notable: the same 3.6% margin appears in R15, R20, and R23 multicore, suggesting a stable architectural advantage in that specific rendering workload rather than a test-specific anomaly.

The use-case split is clear. For physics, encryption, compression, sorting, and floating point math, the Intel Xeon 6960P is the stronger choice. For Cinebench-style rendering, integer math, and single-threaded tasks, the AMD EPYC 9555P takes the lead. The AMD part also holds a small edge in single-thread performance, which can matter in mixed workloads where per-thread responsiveness is relevant.

Architecture Differences

The two CPUs come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel Xeon 6960P uses Granite Rapids architecture on a 5 nm process fabricated by Intel. The AMD EPYC 9555P uses Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm process fabricated by TSMC. The AMD node advantage is reflected in the transistor count: the EPYC 9555P packs 66,520 million transistors across 8 chiplets of 70.6 mm² each, while the Intel part uses 3 dies of 598 mm² each.

Core counts differ significantly. The Intel Xeon 6960P has 72 cores and 144 threads, while the AMD EPYC 9555P has 64 cores and 128 threads. Despite having fewer cores, the AMD part achieves higher clock speeds: 3.20 GHz base and 4.40 GHz boost versus 2.70 GHz base and 3.90 GHz boost for Intel. This clock advantage helps explain the AMD wins in single-thread and Cinebench workloads.

Cache hierarchies also differ. The Intel Xeon 6960P provides 112 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and a massive 432 MB of shared L3. The AMD EPYC 9555P offers 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 256 MB of shared L3. The Intel L3 cache is 68.75% larger, which likely contributes to its wins in data compression, encryption, and random string sorting where large working sets benefit from cache capacity.

Memory and I/O configurations show both similarity and divergence. Both support DDR5 memory with twelve-channel memory buses. The Intel Xeon 6960P has higher memory bandwidth at 614.4 GB/s versus 576.0 GB/s for AMD, a 6.7% advantage. The AMD EPYC 9555P provides more PCIe lanes at 128 Gen 5 lanes versus 96 Gen 5 lanes for Intel. Both support ECC memory and neither includes integrated graphics.

The power envelopes differ substantially. The Intel Xeon 6960P carries a 500 W TDP, while the AMD EPYC 9555P draws 360 W. This 140 W difference means the AMD part achieves its performance with 28% lower power consumption, which has implications for dense server deployments and cooling requirements.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite shows a consistent AMD advantage. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the AMD EPYC 9555P scores 11,610 against 11,194 for Intel, a 3.6% lead. The same margin appears in Cinebench R20 multicore with 48,378 versus 46,645, and in Cinebench R23 multicore with 115,186 versus 111,060. The AMD part also wins the single-core Cinebench tests, though those were only recorded for the AMD side in the head-to-head data.

The Intel Xeon 6960P responds with its largest margin in passmark_physics, scoring 24,937 versus 15,474 for AMD, a 61.2% advantage. This is the single largest delta in the entire comparison. Passmark_find_prime_numbers shows the second-largest gap with Intel at 1,484 versus 1,067, a 39.1% lead. Passmark_random_string_sorting delivers 371,795 for Intel versus 280,398 for AMD, a 32.6% margin.

Data security workloads favor Intel. Passmark_data_encryption scores 162,013 for Intel versus 148,896 for AMD, an 8.8% lead. Passmark_data_compression shows 2,797,724 for Intel versus 2,639,400 for AMD, a 6% advantage. Floating point math also goes to Intel with 527,473 versus 486,407, an 8.4% margin.

The AMD EPYC 9555P takes passmark_integer_math decisively with 787,106 versus 727,750, a 7.5% lead. Passmark_single_thread shows AMD at 3,410 versus Intel at 3,287, a 3.6% margin. Passmark_multithread goes to Intel with 130,659 versus 123,576, a 5.7% lead, while passmark_extended_instructions is nearly tied with Intel at 193,404 versus 191,082, a 1.2% edge.

The overall benchmark averages tell a different story than the head-to-head wins. The Intel Xeon 6960P has an average benchmark score of 365,194 and sits at the 100th percentile of all CPUs. The AMD EPYC 9555P has an average score of 287,066 at the 99th percentile. The Intel nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 9754 at 0.2% behind, the AMD EPYC 9655 at 2.2% ahead, the AMD EPYC 9535 at 3.7% ahead, and the AMD EPYC 9475F at 4.1% behind. The AMD EPYC 9555P nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon 696X at 0.3% behind, the AMD EPYC 9565 at 0.6% ahead, the Intel Xeon 6780E at 2.4% ahead, and the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9970X at 2.6% ahead.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification category. Core count: Intel has 72, AMD has 64. Thread count: Intel has 144, AMD has 128. Base clock: Intel runs at 2.70 GHz, AMD at 3.20 GHz. Boost clock: Intel reaches 3.90 GHz, AMD reaches 4.40 GHz. TDP: Intel draws 500 W, AMD draws 360 W.

Sockets are incompatible: Intel uses Socket 7529, AMD uses Socket SP5. Process nodes differ: Intel uses 5 nm from its own foundry, AMD uses 4 nm from TSMC. Die configurations are radically different: Intel uses 3x 598 mm² dies, AMD uses 8x 70.6 mm² chiplets. The AMD part lists 66,520 million transistors; the Intel part does not list a transistor count.

Cache allocations differ at every level. L1 is 112 KB per core on Intel versus 80 KB per core on AMD. L2 is 2 MB per core on Intel versus 1 MB per core on AMD. L3 is 432 MB shared on Intel versus 256 MB shared on AMD. Memory bandwidth favors Intel at 614.4 GB/s versus 576.0 GB/s. PCIe lanes favor AMD at 128 Gen 5 lanes versus 96 Gen 5 lanes.

Both use DDR5 memory with twelve-channel buses, both support ECC, both target the server/workstation segment, both are currently active production parts, and neither has integrated graphics or an unlocked multiplier. The Intel part released on 2024-09-23 with a launch MSRP of $9625. The AMD part released on 2024-10-09 with a launch MSRP of $7983.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Xeon 6960P has 72 cores and 144 threads, while the AMD EPYC 9555P has 64 cores and 128 threads.

Q: Why does the AMD EPYC 9555P win the Cinebench multicore tests despite having fewer cores?

A: The AMD part runs at higher clock speeds with a 3.20 GHz base and 4.40 GHz boost, compared to 2.70 GHz base and 3.90 GHz boost on the Intel part. The higher clocks compensate for the 8-core deficit in the Cinebench rendering workload.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two?

A: The Intel Xeon 6960P leads passmark_physics by 61.2%, scoring 24,937 versus 15,474. The second-largest gap is passmark_find_prime_numbers at 39.1% in favor of Intel.

Q: Which processor has more cache?

A: The Intel Xeon 6960P has more cache at every level: 112 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 432 MB shared L3. The AMD EPYC 9555P has 80 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 256 MB shared L3.

Q: How do the memory bandwidth figures compare?

A: The Intel Xeon 6960P provides 614.4 GB/s of memory bandwidth, while the AMD EPYC 9555P provides 576.0 GB/s. Both use twelve-channel DDR5 memory with ECC support.

Q: What are the power consumption differences?

A: The Intel Xeon 6960P has a 500 W TDP, while the AMD EPYC 9555P has a 360 W TDP, a 140 W difference in favor of the AMD part.

The Verdict

The data supports a workload-based selection rather than a single overall winner. The Intel Xeon 6960P is the choice for physics calculations, prime number generation, random string sorting, data encryption, data compression, floating point math, and multithreaded PassMark workloads. Its 61.2% lead in physics and 39.1% lead in prime numbers are too large to ignore for those specific tasks.

The AMD EPYC 9555P is the choice for Cinebench rendering, integer math, and single-threaded workloads. Its consistent 3.6% edge across all three Cinebench multicore tests, combined with a 7.5% lead in integer math and a 3.6% lead in single-thread performance, makes it attractive for general-purpose server workloads and rendering tasks.

For power-sensitive environments, the AMD part offers a clear advantage with a 360 W TDP versus 500 W for Intel. For memory-bandwidth-hungry applications, the Intel part provides 614.4 GB/s versus 576.0 GB/s. The Intel part also carries more cores, more threads, and a substantially larger L3 cache. The AMD part responds with higher clock speeds, more PCIe lanes, and a more modern 4 nm process.

The Intel Xeon 6960P sits at the 100th percentile of all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 365,194, while the AMD EPYC 9555P sits at the 99th percentile with an average of 287,066. The Intel part's nearest rivals are all AMD EPYC processors, with the closest being the EPYC 9754 at just 0.2% behind. The AMD part's nearest rivals include both Intel Xeon and AMD EPYC models, with the Intel Xeon 696X at 0.3% behind.

Choose the Intel Xeon 6960P when the workload involves physics, encryption, compression, sorting, or floating point math. Choose the AMD EPYC 9555P when the workload involves rendering, integer math, or requires higher single-thread performance with lower power consumption.